Copyright© 2016 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett &Dunner, LLP. DISCLAIMER: Although we want to hear from you, the information exchanged on this blog cannot and will not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post information that you consider personal or confidential. If you would like Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representation, to establish an attorney-client relationship, you must first enter into a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for more information. One of our lawyers likes to discuss with you the possibility of representing himself. Additional information of exclusion of liability. Given their specific circumstances, U.S. applicants should consider whether they are filing the international design application through the USPTO or directly with the International Bureau (IB).
Direct filing of the application with the GI avoids the payment of a transmission fee to the USPTO and allows the IB to conduct a formal examination earlier, which may be important for applicants who want immediate publication or a certified copy of the international design application. In addition, for applications filed on March 30, 2016 through the IM e-filing interface, applicants have the option to electronically send to the IM corrections of irregularities or defects (including reproductions and corrected documents) through the E-Filing Portfolio Manager. See www.wipo.int/edocs/hagdocs/en/2016/hague_2016_5.pdf. The IB e-filing interface also allows electronic entry of login data, which removes a separate DM/1 form, and the data entered is validated in real time to minimize errors in the filing of the application. In addition, submission through the USPTO is not possible if each applicant does not have at least one U.S. nationality or domicile, habitual residence, or actual business or commercial establishment in the United States. The overall allocation rate for design patent applications that arrive in the United States under the Hague Agreement is much lower than for applications filed as ordinary U.S. design patent applications. Of the 831 applications filed by companies where neither the applicant nor the first inventor are U.S. persons, 549 were filed and 282 were abandoned. The resulting allocation rate of 66% is significantly lower than the total design award rate of 84%.
One in three applications is a waste of money – the applicant receives nothing for it. . . .